For example, a test that requires students to make use of vocabulary words only pertinent to certain areas of the country, whether rural or urban (a city child may have never seen a cow, or know that a cow and a bull are the same animal) might result in poorer assessment of that child than is warranted. A Caucasian child might not be asked to describe common Vietnamese foods, but a recent Vietnamese immigrant might be called to do so on an intelligence test.
This is hardly culturally fair in assessing intelligence, even if children who are immigrants or bilingual might benefit from additional resource room help. Remember, even though a bilingual child may need English help, this is not a reflection of his or her general intelligence quotient, even if poor English ability may result in a lower test score on an English-administered test. After all, an affluent child would likely have a poorer score, if tested in Spanish -- why should a recent immigrant be subject to the same demands? The solution is to test the child for...
But it is crucial that the initial labeling, however, not be a marker, lest the original assessment be proven wrong, because of the student's cultural background and that the appropriate help is given to remedy the problem, whether it be social, linguistic, or cognitive, or a combination of all three.
Works Cited
Cohen Libby G. And Lauren Spencier. (2004) Assessment of Children With Special Needs. New York: Addison Wesley.
